Suchergebnisse

Future mobility planning to cope with ongoing environmental challenges such as air pollution has to be anchored in the work of every public authority worldwide. One recent trend that could support public authorities to meet the European Union's sustainability targets is the creation and sharing of transport and mobility "big" data between public authorities via tools such as crowdsourcing. While the benefits of the use of big data to increase public authorities' efficiency and effectivity and their citizens' lives is well understood, examples from the public sector that highlight public authorities' engagement in such sharing activities is still missing. To date relevant literature has highlighted issues around the capacity of public authorities that hinder shared activities. In this paper we want to raise distrust as a key reason for lack of engagement. Based on comprehensive data collected over the period of 4 years via several workshops and semi-structured interviews with seven public authorities in Europe, we are able to demonstrate that a major obstacle for not providing and sharing data via crowdsourcing for mutual benefit lies primarily in the hands of the public authority's servants of the middle and high-level management. Our results show firstly, that distrust may emerge toward different referents such as the community, particular individuals, or the technology itself and thus, managerial implications have to be very specific to overcome distrust. Secondly, we show how distrust may spread from one referent to another through negative reciprocity and which, if unchecked may lead to an all-encompassing state that affects the whole sharing economy framework and inhibits potential benefits.

In this article I respond to the tendency of the law to approach 'the public interest' as a legal test, thereby drawing the criticism that this narrow notion of what purports to be in the public interest is wholly disconnected from the views of actual publics, and lacks social legitimacy. On the other hand, to simply extrapolate outputs from public engagement work into policy (or indeed law) is equally problematic, and risks being at best ineffective and at worst reinforcing existing inequalities. Given this apparent disconnect between these conceptions of the public interest, and the shortfalls inherent in each, this article scrutinises this disjuncture. I argue that the application of a processual lens to the construction of the legal and regulatory role of the public interest sheds light on how legal notions of the public interest, and attitudes of actual publics towards data sharing, might be reconciled. I characterise this processual approach as being iterative and flexible, specifically drawing attention to the way that multiple actors, processes and interests interact, change and evolve over time in the health research endeavour. This approach is elaborated through two case studies that illustrate how the public interest appears in law (broadly conceived). Its application provides novel insights into the ways in which the public interest can be crafted within and beyond the law to better inform the development of health research regulation.

It is widely believed that rent-sharing reduces the incentives for investment when long term contracts are infeasible because some of the returns to sunk capital are captured by workers. We propose a simple test for the degree of hold-up based on the fraction of capital costs that are deducted from the quasi-rent that determines negotiated wages. We implement the test using a data set that combines Social Security earnings records for workers in the Veneto region of Italy with detailed financial information for employers. We find strong evidence of rent-sharing, with an elasticity of wages with respect to current profitability of the firm of 3-7%, arising mainly from firms in concentrated industries. On the other hand we find little evidence that bargaining lowers the return on investment. Instead, firm-level bargaining appears to split the rents after deducting the full cost of capital.

Presented at the National data integrity conference: data sharing: the how, why, when and when not to share held on June 2-3, 2016 at University of Colorado, Denver, Colorado. The National Data Integrity Conference is a gathering of people sharing new challenges and solutions regarding research data and integrity. This conference aims to provide attendees with both an understanding of data integrity issues and impart practical tools and skills to deal with them. Topics addressed will include data privacy, openness, policy, education and the impacts of sharing data, how to do it, when to do it, and when not to. Speakers and audience members come from diverse fields such as: Academic Research; Information Technology; Quality Assurance; Regulatory Compliance; Private Industry; Grant Funding; Government. ; Dr. Wirz earned her Ph.D. from Oregon Health & Science University in Biochemistry & Molecular Biology and has a B.S. from Oregon State University in Biochemistry & Biophysics. Her research career has spanned 15 years and has covered diverse topics such as transcriptional regulation, macromolecular structure determination, collagen biophysics and DNA repair. Her professional interests include information, data, and knowledge management, as well as the flow of scientific information. She lectures on a variety of topics including professional skills development, data management, scholarly publication ethics, research impact and semantic technologies, and research communication. Jackie is a strong proponent of science outreach and has developed programs and grants designed to promote scientific, data and information literacy. Jackie believes in evolution, salted caramel buttercream and Jane Eyre. ; PowerPoint presentation given on June 2, 2016.

Presented at the National data integrity conference: data sharing: the how, why, when and when not to share held on June 2-3, 2016 at University of Colorado, Denver, Colorado. The National Data Integrity Conference is a gathering of people sharing new challenges and solutions regarding research data and integrity. This conference aims to provide attendees with both an understanding of data integrity issues and impart practical tools and skills to deal with them. Topics addressed will include data privacy, openness, policy, education and the impacts of sharing data, how to do it, when to do it, and when not to. Speakers and audience members come from diverse fields such as: Academic Research; Information Technology; Quality Assurance; Regulatory Compliance; Private Industry; Grant Funding; Government. ; Dr. Wirz earned her Ph.D. from Oregon Health & Science University in Biochemistry & Molecular Biology and has a B.S. from Oregon State University in Biochemistry & Biophysics. Her research career has spanned 15 years and has covered diverse topics such as transcriptional regulation, macromolecular structure determination, collagen biophysics and DNA repair. Her professional interests include information, data, and knowledge management, as well as the flow of scientific information. She lectures on a variety of topics including professional skills development, data management, scholarly publication ethics, research impact and semantic technologies, and research communication. Jackie is a strong proponent of science outreach and has developed programs and grants designed to promote scientific, data and information literacy. Jackie believes in evolution, salted caramel buttercream and Jane Eyre. ; PowerPoint presentation given on June 2, 2016.

When wage contracts are relatively short-lived, rent sharing may reduce the incentives for investment since some of the returns to sunk capital are captured by workers. In this paper we use a matched worker-firm data set from the Veneto region of Italy that combines Social Security earnings records for employees with detailed financial information for employers to measure the degree of rent sharing and test for holdup. We estimate wage models with job match effects, allowing us to control for any permanent differences in productivity across workers, firms, and job matches. We also compare OLS and instrumental variables specifications that use sales of firms in other regions of the country to instrument value-added per worker. We find strong evidence of rent-sharing, with a "Lester range" of variation in wages between profitable and unprofitable firms of around 10%. On the other hand we find little evidence that bargaining lowers the return to investment. Instead, firm-level bargaining in Veneto appears to split the rents after deducting the full cost of capital. Our findings are consistent with a dynamic bargaining model (Crawford, 1988) in which workers pay up front for the returns to sunk capital they will capture in later periods

AbstractMany apps request access to users' contacts or photos and many consumers agree to these requests. However, agreeing is ethically questionable as it also gives apps access to others' data. People thus regularly infringe each other's information privacy. This behavior is at odds with offline practices and still poorly understood. Introducing a novel application of the theory of neutralization, we explore how people justify the giving away of others' data and the emerging norms surrounding this behavior. To obtain a deeper understanding of the potentially ambiguous norms surrounding the behavior, we investigate how people justify, i.e., neutralize, the behavior from both offender and victim perspectives. Across four studies, offenders appear more likely to admit to moral wrongdoing than victims assume. This suggests moral disagreement between offenders and victims. The discrepancy appears to be reasonably robust across different samples, apps and whether the other is identified, but diminishes when people learn how easily others' data could be protected. These insights offer suggestions for businesses, consumers and public policy.

The presentation draws on a use case from political science to demonstrate integrated scholarly processes for curating and publishing data. Curation activities are distributed across institutional and national repositories, archives, registries and websites. In workflows which prioritise existing research practice and disciplinary standards, researchers provide structured metadata to the Australian Data Archive (ADA) using a template based on the Data Documentation Initiative (DDI). These metadata are mapped to RDF and RIF-CS standards and sent to the institutional repository at UNSW Australia, for publication and further dissemination. The primary role of the institutional repository is to move the data around - to apply standards and protocols that enable the data to be widely and openly accessible.The implementation supports researchers in comprehensively describing their research methods and data according to a widely-adopted disciplinary standard, and reduces their workload relating to institutional reporting and dissemination. The integrity of the institutional data repository is increased by its direct integration with the rich descriptions of data in the disciplinary archive. Added value for the institution is derived from the reporting capabilities of the repository, which links to enterprise systems to generate statistics about the University's research assets.